What's keeping the West from making DOAX style games?

[gyrobot_v1legacy]

[HEADING=2]Mod Voice[/HEADING]

I'll make one final request in this thread for people to behave, please. I like to think it's possible to have a debate about something without having to resort to telling each other to "find another playmate" and all this other back-and-forth nonsense which is only serving to derail the thread.

I think it's always worth remembering the following from the code of conduct whenever you write any replies.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but no one is entitled to attack others for that opinion. If you can't communicate without using combative, aggressive, or passive aggressive responses, then consider that these may not be the forums for you. Focus your response on your disagreement with a person's opinion, not on the person.

If you can't do that, I will lock the thread.

Thanks.

P.S. Please don't re-report posts prior to this one, this warning covers everyone before this post. Clean slate now. Thanks guys.

 

[Gamerpalooza]

The fact that I mentioned HOTS multiple times

Yeah i skimmed and ignored it because you mention budget and finance like it's the deciding factor. You still do in this point and it ain't. There's a lot more factors in play than just money.

 

[EternallyBored]

The fact that I mentioned HOTS multiple times

Yeah i skimmed and ignored it because you mention budget and finance like it's the deciding factor. You still do in this point and it ain't. There's a lot more factors in play than just money.

And there's more factors in play than just culture and PR, which is my whole point, that even if there was 0 stigma attached, and hell, even if blizzard's corporate culture changed, DOAX is not the kind of game Blizzard would chose to make. Blizzard makes big budget high visibility games with serious mainstream marketing, the acceptability of sexualization does not change the fact that Blizzard does not make, at best, simple minigame collections hung around a premise like, "overwatch girls are now all on a beach for some reason". Even HOTS has more than that surrounding it.

If Blizzard totally changed their beliefs and stance on the subject, what we would get wouldn't be DOAX, it's too small time, what we would get would be a ramped up WoW with costumes like TERA online, or sexy Addons to existing properties like a swimsuit pack for Overwatch. We would get big budget games or Addons to existing stuff so Blizzard can hit mainstream and fan service markets at the same time, not a B level spinoff, because that is the entire point of what I've been saying. Blizzard doesn't do half assed spinoffs like DOAX, that is just a collection of mediocre minigames, or the first game which has a functional but overly simple beach valleyball mechanic.

 

[someguy1231]

Sex appeal alone can't sell a game. Why pay $60 for a game full of girls in bikinis when you have limitless amounts of free porn online? And even then, you can always watch someone's "Let's Play" of that game in question if you just want some eye candy.

Then again, I think anything other than fun gameplay can't sell a game alone. A game could have the best story I've ever seen, but if it's not fun to play, I won't buy it.

 

[deadish]

I guess it's because publishers don't want the endless complain letters and Walmart freaking out, pulling it from the shelves - i.e. they don't want a moral panic.

KT can get away with it because they have a relative stable audience in the Japanese market and no moral panic to worry about there.

DOAX is a spin-off of the DOA fighting game. The jiggling boobs was probably just a gag the developers included which sort of became the game's trademark. LOL

Japan also already has a (mostly underground and low budget) erotic game market in the Dating Sim and Visual Novel genre - although not all of them are "erotic games" though. This market probably existed since the 80s.

So doing a fanservice spin-off of DOA isn't that huge of a leap for them - there is already a market that they could target and potentially tap into.

 

[Estarc]

Indeed. EA was so scared, they paid fake protesters to pretend like they were religious people protesting their new game, Dante's Inferno, in order to drum up false controversy. They also created an entire add campaign centered around how "your mom will hate it." Copious amounts of violence and nudity were added for good measure.

Those western business men sure are terrified of soccer moms and religion!

Funny. That was in 2010. The political landscape has shifted drastically since then as I'm sure you know, since you picked such an old game for an example.

Plus pretending a game is more controversial than it is is wildly different from making a game that is ACTUALLY controversial.

 

[Fox12]

Indeed. EA was so scared, they paid fake protesters to pretend like they were religious people protesting their new game, Dante's Inferno, in order to drum up false controversy. They also created an entire add campaign centered around how "your mom will hate it." Copious amounts of violence and nudity were added for good measure.

Those western business men sure are terrified of soccer moms and religion!

Funny. That was in 2010. The political landscape has shifted drastically since then as I'm sure you know, since you picked such an old game for an example.

Plus pretending a game is more controversial than it is is wildly different from making a game that is ACTUALLY controversial.

2010? One year before the issue of video game violence would be brought before the Supreme Court, possibly leading to real video game censorship? As opposed to the fake censorship everyone's talking about now? The landscape may be different, but it was no less controversial. The stakes were much higher then. The idea that suits are more scared now then they were then is silly. If they were terrified of soccer moms and religion then they wouldn't have built their entire campaign around trying to tick those people off. Which is actually kind of funny, because neither the Christians nor the soccer moms seemed to care.

Furthermore, I thought that the argument was that we have a history of religious prudishness, and that that explains why certain games don't sale? Because now you're telling me that this is a recent development, since so much has changed since 2010. Which is it?

 

[Estarc]

2010? One year before the issue of video game violence would be brought before the Supreme Court, possibly leading to real video game censorship? As opposed to the fake censorship everyone's talking about now? The landscape may be different, but it was no less controversial. The stakes were much higher then. The idea that suits are more scared now then they were then is silly. If they were terrified of soccer moms and religion then they wouldn't have built their entire campaign around trying to tick those people off. Which is actually kind of funny, because neither the Christians nor the soccer moms seemed to care.

Furthermore, I thought that the argument was that we have a history of religious prudishness, and that that explains why certain games don't sale? Because now you're telling me that this is a recent development, since so much has changed since 2010. Which is it?

When I say the political landscape has shifted, I am referring to the fact that we've moved away from violence being the focus of controversy to sexual themes and imagery being the focus. I definitely agree the word censorship is being thrown around outside its definition nowadays, but that's because the English language doesn't have a word that fits any better. You're correct the stakes are very different. Currently the arguments and debates going on are between people interested in games and debating the merits of certain types of content. However I believe the reason we are seeing, for example, Japanese publishers cover up female characters in games they bring to the West is because no one wants negative attention from outside the gaming industry focused on them.

I mean come on. Have you played Bravely Default or Bravely Second? They are JRPGs on the Nintendo 3DS with little chibi characters. Nintendo felt the need to make some of the characters costumes less revealing when they released the games here. They have an M rating (15+, not sure US equivalent) so it isn't like they are aimed at children.

There's also a kickback against sexual imagery in games from within the industry itself of course. There's been a push for more female leading roles in games and better representation of female characters in recent years (which is good) but it has been accompanied by condemnation of sexy female characters at the same time (which is bad in my opinion). I think it is great to convey a message that it is okay for devs to make female characters that aren't models, that aren't young hot girls if they want to, that it still has an audience. I think it is bad to criticise any dev that chooses to make a young hot model as their female lead anyway. Is this push from within our industry a greater concern for publishers than the idea of attracting negative attention from outside the industry again? I don't know.

Anyway, end of the day, my first comment was a throwaway one, I didn't expect to actually be debating this issue. I like to drop into a thread, comment once and leave. I don't actually expect angry soccer moms are campaigning or have ever campaigned against adult themes in video games in any organised movement or great numbers. Thanks for ruining my jam. I do think that publishers are hesitant to develop or localise games with sexual themes as a primary focus though, and it isn't because they don't have a market.

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

Lol, maybe nothing's stopping them and they don't care to? I mean, I think genearly companies try to focus on game play to some degree to sell their games.

 

[Metalix Knightmare]

Sex appeal alone can't sell a game. Why pay $60 for a game full of girls in bikinis when you have limitless amounts of free porn online? And even then, you can always watch someone's "Let's Play" of that game in question if you just want some eye candy.

You ARE aware that the Hooters Restaurant chain is still a thing yes? As are Bikini bars?

People like teasing sight just as much as they like open titillation dude. Fact of life.

 

[Avnger]

Sex appeal alone can't sell a game. Why pay $60 for a game full of girls in bikinis when you have limitless amounts of free porn online? And even then, you can always watch someone's "Let's Play" of that game in question if you just want some eye candy.

You ARE aware that the Hooters Restaurant chain is still a thing yes? As are Bikini bars?

People like teasing sight just as much as they like open titillation dude. Fact of life.

Hooters/bars also serve pretty good food and drinks.

Me thinks he's trying to say that there are plenty of ways to get said "titillation" without having to do it through a crappy game that offers barely anything else. Why would a developer spend time and money to make a mediocre game that is primarily aimed at a niche audience and will likely turn off a bunch of regular customers who don't appreciate the titillation and not great gameplay? It doesn't make business sense to do so (at least in the West). Rockstar (for example) is better off pumping out another GTA or something which essentially prints money for them.

EDIT: If these games are your thing, that's great and cool for you. Expecting every gaming niche to go mainstream, however, is naive and likely to never happen.

 

[Ragsnstitches]

Anyway, end of the day, my first comment was a throwaway one, I didn't expect to actually be debating this issue. I like to drop into a thread, comment once and leave. I don't actually expect angry soccer moms are campaigning or have ever campaigned against adult themes in video games in any organised movement or great numbers. Thanks for ruining my jam. I do think that publishers are hesitant to develop or localise games with sexual themes as a primary focus though, and it isn't because they don't have a market.

It's because explicit sexual content can and likely will lead to an AO rating, which can result in limited avenues of sale as certain popular retailers don't supply adult only content (regardless of medium). This can literally kill some games if the popular avenues of sale are cut off.

http://kotaku.com/atlus-making-four-cuts-in-upcoming-game-to-avoid-an-adu-1699956742

The fear is not from people getting their knickers in a knot on twitter or tumblr (if anyone says it is they are just gas lighting for the sake of raising a product profile). It's from a loss of sale potential. It's easier to get graphic violence under an adults only rating then nipples which is why it's easier to find violent media then anything sexual in more conventional retailers... this has been the case for decades and is not a new development.

http://www.polygon.com/2014/2/10/5397680/the-cold-war-on-the-ao-rating-must-stop-if-gaming-is-to-grow-up

"The problem is that the Adults Only rating kills games. This isn?t an exaggeration; most retailers refuse to carry AO games, and no console will allow them on the platform. This isn?t the fault of the ratings board, the existence of an NC-17 equivalent is a healthy rating, this is the fault of the retailers and platform holders falling for the fallacy that video games are still for children."

Things are changing slowly. Valve has started letting erotic games/VNs appear on their service though I believe they are censored to some degree from their original release (could be wrong, I don't play them). Sony and Microsoft are still in a weird spot but they seem to budging and Nintendo is still stuck in 90's mode in almost every form of modernity.

But countries still need to revamp how restrictive age ratings have become. As mentioned in the above Polygon article, age ratings were meant to broaden the types of games that could be made, not shrink them. An AO should just be a classification for consumer awareness, not a malady.

 

[DementedSheep]

Why would you need to buy a separate titty game when you have mountains of free porn and have softcore wank bait shoved into everything anyway?

Because there's something to be said for being teased by the content to make you want to see more.

Because western media doesn't do teasing? did you miss the fact that I wasn't only talking about full on porn?

 

[Metalix Knightmare]

Why would you need to buy a separate titty game when you have mountains of free porn and have softcore wank bait shoved into everything anyway?

Because there's something to be said for being teased by the content to make you want to see more.

Because western media doesn't do teasing? did you miss the fact that I wasn't only talking about full on porn?

Because you weren't talking about anything but full on porn? And Western Media doesn't do teasing? Yeah, Jessica Rabbit says hi.


Western media does PLENTY of teasing.

Edit: Actually, I didn't even need to bring up Jessica. Women's Lingerie has been proving my point for YEARS now! Sexy, scanty, but never fully nude, always teasing.

Hooters/bars also serve pretty good food and drinks.

That they do. It's also not why people started going in there, nor is it what they're famous for.

Me thinks he's trying to say that there are plenty of ways to get said "titillation" without having to do it through a crappy game that offers barely anything else.

Lots of websites are based around just that dude. Heck, DLSite basically serves asa porn game version of Steam.

Why would a developer spend time and money to make a mediocre game that is primarily aimed at a niche audience and will likely turn off a bunch of regular customers who don't appreciate the titillation and not great gameplay?

Why would the regular customers be turned off because the publisher made a game that doesn't interest them? They'd just not buy it and buy the games the publisher makes that DOES interest them. I didn't like Manhunt, but that never stopped me from buying other Rockstar games. I just wasn't part of the Manhunt market.

Not to mention just because something is niche doesn't mean it's unprofitable. Dark Souls is pretty darn niche, or at least it was, but it's still profitable.

As for why a dev would make a game like that? Sex sells. Standard of Marketing since Marketing was a thing dude. Added bonus in that the design standards of these types of games are so low that you don't need to invest much reasources into them and don't need to sell a bunch of them to make bank.

It doesn't make business sense to do so (at least in the West). Rockstar (for example) is better off pumping out another GTA or something which essentially prints money for them.

Makes plenty of sense actually. GTA isn't going to be popular forever. Eventually it WILL drop off, and if Rockstar has nothing else to sell, they're in DEEP Shiza.

EDIT: If these games are your thing, that's great and cool for you. Expecting every gaming niche to go mainstream, however, is naive and likely to never happen.

No one's asking for mainstream, they're asking for products PERIOD.

 

[DementedSheep]

Why would you need to buy a separate titty game when you have mountains of free porn and have softcore wank bait shoved into everything anyway?

Because there's something to be said for being teased by the content to make you want to see more.

Because western media doesn't do teasing? did you miss the fact that I wasn't only talking about full on porn?

Because you weren't talking about anything but full on porn? And Western Media doesn't do teasing? Yeah, Jessica Rabbit says hi.


Western media does PLENTY of teasing.

Edit: Actually, I didn't even need to bring up Jessica. Women's Lingerie has been proving my point for YEARS now! Sexy, scanty, but never fully nude, always teasing.

That was my point and why I was asking you. You were the one who implied it doesn't by responding to me saying their is no reason for people to bother paying for a serrate titty game in the west by saying people want to be teased.

 

[infohippie]

Me thinks he's trying to say that there are plenty of ways to get said "titillation" without having to do it through a crappy game that offers barely anything else. Why would a developer spend time and money to make a mediocre game that is primarily aimed at a niche audience and will likely turn off a bunch of regular customers who don't appreciate the titillation and not great gameplay?

See, that's exactly what some of us are saying. If you want JUST titillation, there are cheaper and easier ways of obtaining it. These products don't sell, not because there is no demand for them, but because when western devs try it they don't bother putting in the work to make good gameplay and/or story. They just release a game full of titties and are surprised when their potential audience says "Nice boobs, crap story, terrible gameplay, not buying it." They don't seem to expect the audience to be capable of seeing past the boobs, perhaps. Maybe because of some unspoken assumption that people who like sexuality in their entertainment don't have the taste or intelligence to appreciate other aspects of media.
A crappy game is a crappy game whether it contains sexual themes or not. Respect your audience and give them a good game that also includes titillation and it will sell like hotcakes.

 

[Metalix Knightmare]

Me thinks he's trying to say that there are plenty of ways to get said "titillation" without having to do it through a crappy game that offers barely anything else. Why would a developer spend time and money to make a mediocre game that is primarily aimed at a niche audience and will likely turn off a bunch of regular customers who don't appreciate the titillation and not great gameplay?

See, that's exactly what some of us are saying. If you want JUST titillation, there are cheaper and easier ways of obtaining it. These products don't sell, not because there is no demand for them, but because when western devs try it they don't bother putting in the work to make good gameplay and/or story. They just release a game full of titties and are surprised when their potential audience says "Nice boobs, crap story, terrible gameplay, not buying it." They don't seem to expect the audience to be capable of seeing past the boobs, perhaps. Maybe because of some unspoken assumption that people who like sexuality in their entertainment don't have the taste or intelligence to appreciate other aspects of media.
A crappy game is a crappy game whether it contains sexual themes or not. Respect your audience and give them a good game that also includes titillation and it will sell like hotcakes.

As was stated before, Visual Novels are BARELY games (They have lose states, that's about it.) but they tend to sell relatively well, and they're pretty much the primary source of porn games.

That all said, you're also not wrong. Most VNs need to have multiple ending paths to get people to be willing to play them again. Actually good games will get people coming back just by being fun to play.

 

[Metalix Knightmare]

Why would you need to buy a separate titty game when you have mountains of free porn and have softcore wank bait shoved into everything anyway?

Because there's something to be said for being teased by the content to make you want to see more.

Because western media doesn't do teasing? did you miss the fact that I wasn't only talking about full on porn?

Because you weren't talking about anything but full on porn? And Western Media doesn't do teasing? Yeah, Jessica Rabbit says hi.


Western media does PLENTY of teasing.

Edit: Actually, I didn't even need to bring up Jessica. Women's Lingerie has been proving my point for YEARS now! Sexy, scanty, but never fully nude, always teasing.

That was my point and why I was asking you. You were the one who implied it doesn't by responding to me saying their is no reason for people to bother paying for a serrate titty game in the west by saying people want to be teased.

Okay, at this point I have no idea if I'm just tired after a work shift, but your post is making VERY little sense here and I honestly have no idea what you're even talking about anymore.

As I stated before though, there are entire industries based entirely around basically teasing people with sexy, but not nude material. Hooters, Victoria's secret, etc. People DO pay to be teased. Tittilation can sell a product, and it can sell by itself. The idea that people would willingly pay for a game where the main idea is titillation (Which was the word I originally wanted but it wasn't coming to me) is NOT even remotely a new concept, just one that isn't done very well usually.

Seriously though, if there wasn't a market for titillation Victoria's Secret would've gone out of business LONG ago.

 

[infohippie]

Me thinks he's trying to say that there are plenty of ways to get said "titillation" without having to do it through a crappy game that offers barely anything else. Why would a developer spend time and money to make a mediocre game that is primarily aimed at a niche audience and will likely turn off a bunch of regular customers who don't appreciate the titillation and not great gameplay?

See, that's exactly what some of us are saying. If you want JUST titillation, there are cheaper and easier ways of obtaining it. These products don't sell, not because there is no demand for them, but because when western devs try it they don't bother putting in the work to make good gameplay and/or story. They just release a game full of titties and are surprised when their potential audience says "Nice boobs, crap story, terrible gameplay, not buying it." They don't seem to expect the audience to be capable of seeing past the boobs, perhaps. Maybe because of some unspoken assumption that people who like sexuality in their entertainment don't have the taste or intelligence to appreciate other aspects of media.
A crappy game is a crappy game whether it contains sexual themes or not. Respect your audience and give them a good game that also includes titillation and it will sell like hotcakes.

As was stated before, Visual Novels are BARELY games (They have lose states, that's about it.) but they tend to sell relatively well, and they're pretty much the primary source of porn games.

That all said, you're also not wrong. Most VNs need to have multiple ending paths to get people to be willing to play them again. Actually good games will get people coming back just by being fun to play.

VNs do, however (usually, not always) have good characterisation and story. They're not reliant on their sex scenes to sell, and in fact the sex scenes are often only a small part of the story.